Deeper Down the Rabbit Hole: How Technology Conspiracy Beliefs Emerge and Foster a Conspiracy Mindset

References

• Akhlaghpour S, Wu J, Lapointe L, Pinsonneault A (2013) The ongoing quest for the IT artifact: Looking back, moving forward. J. Inform. Tech. 28(2):150–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Avgerou C (2019) Contextual explanation: Alternative approaches and persistent challenges. MIS Quart. 43(3):977–1006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1988) On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 16(1):74–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1989) On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs. J. Marketing Res. 26(3):271–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin DA, Baird JA (2001) Discerning intentions in dynamic human action. Trends Cognitive Sci. 5(4):171–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Biddlestone M, Green R, Cichocka A, Douglas K, Sutton R (2022) A systematic review and meta-analytic synthesis of the motives associated with conspiracy beliefs. Preprint, submitted April 8, https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/rxjqc.Google Scholar
• Biddlestone M, Green R, Cichocka A, Sutton R, Douglas K (2021) Conspiracy beliefs and the individual, relational, and collective selves. Soc. Personality Psych. Compass 15(10):e12639.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blut M, Chong AYL, Tsigna Z, Venkatesh V (2022) Meta-analysis of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Challenging its validity and charting a research agenda in the red ocean. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 23(1):13–95.Google Scholar
• Burant CJ (2022) A methodological note: An introduction to autoregressive models. Internat. J. Aging Human Development 95(4):516–522.Google Scholar
• Butler JV, Miller JB (2018) Social risk and the dimensionality of intentions. Management Sci. 64(6):2787–2796.Link, Google Scholar
• Campion-Vincent V (2017) From evil others to evil elites: A dominant pattern in conspiracy theories today. Fine GA, Campion-Vincent V, Heath C, eds. Rumor Mills (Routledge, Milton Park, UK), 103–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chater N, Loewenstein G (2016) The under-appreciated drive for sense-making. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 126:137–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clarke J, Chen H, Du D, Hu YJ (2021) Fake news, investor attention, and market reaction. Inform. Systems Res. 32(1):35–52.Link, Google Scholar
• Cocosila M, Archer N, Yuan Y (2009) Early investigation of new information technology acceptance: A perceived risk-motivation model. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 25(1):30.Google Scholar
• Cookson D, Jolley D, Dempsey RC, Povey R (2021) “If they believe, then so shall I”: Perceived beliefs of the in-group predict conspiracy theory belief. Group Processes Intergroup Relations 24(5):759–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Courtois C, Montrieux H, De Grove F, Raes A, De Marez L, Schellens T (2014) Student acceptance of tablet devices in secondary education: A three-wave longitudinal cross-lagged case study. Comput. Human Behav. 35:278–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DiFonzo N (2018) Conspiracy rumor psychology. Uscinski JE, ed. Conspiracy Theories and the People Who Believe Them (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 257–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dinev T, McConnell AR, Smith HJ (2015) Research commentary—Informing privacy research through information systems, psychology, and behavioral economics: Thinking outside the “APCO” box. Inform. Systems Res. 26(4):639–655.Link, Google Scholar
• Đorđević JM, Žeželj I, Đurić Ž (2021) Beyond general political attitudes: Conspiracy mentality as a global belief system predicts endorsement of international and local conspiracy theories. J. Soc. Political Psych. 9(1):144–158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Douglas KM, Sutton RM (2023) What are conspiracy theories? A definitional approach to their correlates, consequences, and communication. Annual Rev. Psych. 74:271–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Douglas KM, Sutton RM, Cichocka A (2017) The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 26(6):538–542.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Douglas KM, Uscinski JE, Sutton RM, Cichocka A, Nefes T, Ang CS, Deravi F (2019) Understanding conspiracy theories. Political Psych. 40(1):3–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drążkiewicz E (2021) Taking vaccine regret and hesitancy seriously. The role of truth, conspiracy theories, gender relations and trust in the HPV immunisation programmes in Ireland. J. Cultural Res. 25(1):69–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyrendal A, Kennair LEO, Lewis JR (2018) The role of conspiracy mentality and paranormal beliefs in predicting conspiracy beliefs among neopagans. J. Stud. New Religions 8(1):73–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Echterhoff G, Higgins ET (2017) Creating shared reality in interpersonal and intergroup communication: The role of epistemic processes and their interplay. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psych. 28(1):175–226.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Enders AM, Farhart C, Miller J, Uscinski J, Saunders K, Drochon H (2023) Are republicans and conservatives more likely to believe conspiracy theories? Political Behav. 45:2001–2004.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Enders AM, Uscinski JE, Klofstad CA, Seelig MI, Wuchty S, Murthi MN, Premaratne K, Funchion JR (2021) Do conspiracy beliefs form a belief system? Examining the structure and organization of conspiracy beliefs. J. Soc. Political Psych. 9(1):255–271.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epstein S, Pacini R, Denes-Raj V, Heier H (1996) Individual differences in intuitive—Experiential and analytical—Rational thinking styles. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 71(2):390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fast NJ, Gruenfeld DH, Sivanathan N, Galinsky AD (2009) Illusory control: A generative force behind power’s far-reaching effects. Psych. Sci. 20(4):502–508.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Featherman MS, Pavlou PA (2003) Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. Internat. J. Human Comput. Stud. 59(4):451–474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ferretti L, Wymant C, Kendall M, Zhao L, Nurtay A, Abeler-Dörner L, Parker M, Bonsall D, Fraser C (2020) Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 transmission suggests epidemic control with digital contact tracing. Science 368(6491):eabb6936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischer C, Schröder A, Taylor JE, Heider J (2021) Measuring driving fear: Development and validation of the Instrument for Fear of Driving (IFD). Eur. J. Psych. Assessment 39(1):49–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• French II RP (2016) The fuzziness of mindsets: Divergent conceptualizations and characterizations of mindset theory and praxis. Internat. J. Organ. Anal. 24(4):673–691.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frenken M, Imhoff R (2021) A uniform conspiracy mindset or differentiated reactions to specific conspiracy beliefs? Evidence from latent profile analyses. Rev. Internat. Psych. Soc. 34(1):1–15.Google Scholar
• Gallagher HL, Frith CD (2003) Functional imaging of “theory of mind.” Trends Cognitive Sci. 7(2):77–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gephart RP Jr (1993) The textual approach: Risk and blame in disaster sensemaking. Acad. Management J. 36(6):1465–1514.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerts D, Shelley CD, Parikh N, Pitts T, Ross CW, Fairchild G, Chavez NYV, Daughton AR (2021) “Thought I’d share first” and other conspiracy theory tweets from the COVID-19 infodemic: Exploratory study. JMIR Public Health Surveillance 7(4):e26527.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goreis A, Voracek M (2019) A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological research on conspiracy beliefs: Field characteristics, measurement instruments, and associations with personality traits. Frontiers Psych. 10:205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Granadas Samayoa JA, Moore CA, Ruisch BC, Boggs ST, Ladanyi JT, Fazio RH (2022) A gateway conspiracy? Belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories prospectively predicts greater conspiracist ideation. PLoS One 17(10):e0275502.Google Scholar
• Grzesiak-Feldman M (2013) The effect of high-anxiety situations on conspiracy thinking. Current Psych. 32(1):100–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamaker EL, Kuiper RM, Grasman RP (2015) A critique of the cross-lagged panel model. Psych. Methods 20(1):102–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 43(1):115–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hern A (2018) Shhh … Alexa might be listening. The Guardian (April 11), https://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2018/apr/11/shhh-alexa-might-be-listening.Google Scholar
• Howard JL, Bureau JS, Guay F, Chong JX, Ryan RM (2021) Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspect. Psych. Sci. 16(6):1300–1323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imhoff R, Bruder M (2014) Speaking (un-)truth to power: Conspiracy mentality as a generalised political attitude. Eur. J. Personality 28(1):25–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imhoff R, Bertlich T, Frenken M (2022) Tearing apart the “evil” twins: A general conspiracy mentality is not the same as specific conspiracy beliefs. Current Opinion Psych. 46:101349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jennings W, Stoker G, Bunting H, Valgarðsson VO, Gaskell J, Devine D, McKay L, Mills MC (2021) Lack of trust, conspiracy beliefs, and social media use predict COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccines (Basel) 9(6):593.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jia R, Steelman ZR, Reich BH (2017) Using Mechanical Turk data in IS research: Risks, rewards, and recommendations. Comm. AIS 41(1):301–318.Google Scholar
• Jolley D, Marques MD, Cookson D (2022) Shining a spotlight on the dangerous consequences of conspiracy theories. Current Opinions Psych. 47:101363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones EE, Nisbett RE (1972) The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. Jones EE, Kanouse DE, Kelley HH, Nisbett RE, Valins S, Weiner B, eds. Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior (General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ), 79–94.Google Scholar
• Jost JT, Glaser J, Sulloway FJ, Kruglanski AW (2018) Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Kruglanski AW, ed. The Motivated Mind (Routledge, London), 129–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karwatzki S, Trenz M, Veit D (2022) The multidimensional nature of privacy risks: Conceptualisation, measurement and implications for digital services. Inform. Systems J. 32(6):1126–1157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kelley HH, Michela JL (1980) Attribution theory and research. Annual Rev. Psych. 31(1):457–501.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kenny DA (2013) SEM: Autoregressive models. Retrieved August 21, 2023, https://davidakenny.net/cm/ar.htm.Google Scholar
• Khan A, Brohman K, Addas S (2022) The anatomy of ‘fake news’: Studying false messages as digital objects. J. Inform. Tech. 37(2):122–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kraemer T, Weiger WH, Trang S, Trenz M (2023) Deflected by the tin foil hat? Word of mouth, conspiracy beliefs, and the adoption of innovative public health apps. J. Production Innovation Management 40(2):154–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kreko P (2020) Countering conspiracy theories and misinformation. Butter M, Knight P, eds. Handbook of Conspiracy Theories (Routledge, Milton Park, UK), 242–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kunda Z (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psych. Bull. 108(3):480–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lazer DM, Baum MA, Benkler Y, Berinsky AJ, Greenhill KM, Menczer F, Metzger MJ, Nyhan B, Pennycook G, Rothschild D (2018) The science of fake news. Science 359(6380):1094–1096.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levenson H (1973) Multidimensional locus of control in psychiatric patients. J. Consulting Clinical Psych. 41(3):397–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liekefett L, Christ O, Becker JC (2023) Can conspiracy beliefs be beneficial? Longitudinal linkages between conspiracy beliefs, anxiety, uncertainty aversion, and existential threat. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 49(2):167–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2001) Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. J. Appl. Psych. 86(1):114–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Litman JA (2008) Interest and deprivation factors of epistemic curiosity. Personality Individual Differences 44(7):1585–1595.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lowry PB, D’Arcy J, Hammer B, Moody GD (2016) “Cargo Cult” science in traditional organization and information systems survey research: A case for using nontraditional methods of data collection, including Mechanical Turk and online panels. J. Strategic Inform. Systems 25(3):232–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lundby K (2014) Mediatization of Communication (Walter de Gruyter, Berlin).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magee JC, Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: The self‐reinforcing nature of power and status. Acad. Management Ann. 2(1):351–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marchlewska M, Cichocka A, Kossowska M (2018) Addicted to answers: Need for cognitive closure and the endorsement of conspiracy beliefs. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 48(2):109–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Management Rev. 20(3):709–734.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meredith W (1993) Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika 58(4):525–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mikhaeil CA, Baskerville RL (2024) Explaining online conspiracy theory radicalization: A second-order affordance for identity-driven escalation. Inform. Systems J. 34(3):711–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller JM, Saunders KL, Farhart CE (2016) Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust. Amer. J. Political Sci. 60(4):824–844.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moravec PL, Kim A, Dennis AR, Minas RK (2022) Do you really know if it’s true? How asking users to rate stories affects belief in fake news on social media. Inform. Systems Res. 33(3):887–907.Link, Google Scholar
• Nastjuk I, Trang S, Grummeck-Braamt JV, Adam MT, Tarafdar M (2024) Integrating and synthesising technostress research: A meta-analysis on technostress creators, outcomes, and IS usage contexts. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 33(3):361–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nera K, Bertin P, Klein O (2022) Conspiracy theories as opportunistic attributions of power. Current Opinion Psych. 47:101381.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Neuberg SL, Kenrick DT, Schaller M (2011) Human threat management systems: Self-protection and disease avoidance. Neuroscience Biobehavioral Rev. 35(4):1042–1051.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ng JY, Ntoumanis N, Thøgersen-Ntoumani C, Deci EL, Ryan RM, Duda JL, Williams GC (2012) Self-determination theory applied to health contexts: A meta-analysis. Perspectives Psych. Sci. 7(4):325–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ning HK, Downing K (2010) The impact of supplemental instruction on learning competence and academic performance. Stud. Higher Ed. 35(8):921–939.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oh O, Agrawal M, Rao HR (2013) Community intelligence and social media services: A rumor theoretic analysis of tweets during social crises. MIS Quart. 37(2):407–426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ohlwein M, Bruno P (2022) A brand like a friend—How brand likeability influences brand perception. Internat. J. Marketing Res. 64(3):295–305.Google Scholar
• Orlikowski WJ, Iacono CS (2001) Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research—A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Inform. Systems Res. 12(2):121–134.Link, Google Scholar
• Orosz G, Krekó P, Paskuj B, Tóth-Király I, Bőthe B, Roland-Lévy C (2016) Changing conspiracy beliefs through rationality and ridiculing. Frontiers Psych. 7:1525.Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psych. 88(5):879–903.Crossref, Google Scholar
• PytlikZillig LM, Kimbrough CD, Shockley E, Neal TM, Herian MN, Hamm JA, Bornstein BH, Tomkins AJ (2017) A longitudinal and experimental study of the impact of knowledge on the bases of institutional trust. PLoS One 12(4):e0175387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qu G, Wang J, Lu X, Xu Q, Wang Q (2022) Network configuration in app design: The effects of simplex and multiplex networks on team performance. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 23(6):1532–1556.Google Scholar
• Reeves B, Ram N, Robinson TN, Cummings JJ, Giles CL, Pan J, Chiatti A, Cho MJ, Roehrick K, Yang X (2021) Screenomics: A framework to capture and analyze personal life experiences and the ways that technology shapes them. Human Comput. Interaction 36(2):150–201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reiss S, Leen-Thomele E, Klackl J, Jonas E (2021) Exploring the landscape of psychological threat: A cartography of threats and threat responses. Soc. Personality Psych. Compass 15(4):e12588.Google Scholar
• Rousseau DL, Garcia-Retamero R (2007) Identity, power, and threat perception: A cross-national experimental study. J. Conflict Resolution 51(5):744–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ryan RM, Deci EL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Amer. Psych. 55(1):68–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwartz J (1999) Microsoft denies NSA has keys to windows. Washington Post (September 4), https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1999/09/04/microsoft-denies-nsa-has-keys-to-windows/4c47de99-8289-465d-957c-d46aeb6c6439/.Google Scholar
• Shapiro GK, Holding A, Perez S, Amsel R, Rosberger Z (2016) Validation of the vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. Papillomavirus Res. 2:167–172.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shermer M (2011) The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies-How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths (Times Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Siegrist M (2021) Trust and risk perception: A critical review of the literature. Risk Anal. 41(3):480–490.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G, Roth C (2000) Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Anal. 20(3):353–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simmering MJ, Fuller CM, Richardson HA, Ocal Y, Atinc GM (2015) Marker variable choice, reporting, and interpretation in the detection of common method variance: A review and demonstration. Organ. Res. Methods 18(3):473–511.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Singh JP, Kumar A, Rana NP, Dwivedi YK (2022) Attention-based LSTM network for rumor veracity estimation of tweets. Inform. Systems Frontiers 24(2):459–474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sunstein CR, Vermeule A (2009) Conspiracy theories: Causes and cures. J. Political Philos. 17(2):202–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutton RM, Douglas KM (2020) Conspiracy theories and the conspiracy mindset: Implications for political ideology. Current Opinion Behav. Sci. 34:118–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swami V, Coles R, Stieger S, Pietschnig J, Furnham A, Rehim S, Voracek M (2011) Conspiracist ideation in Britain and Austria: Evidence of a monological belief system and associations between individual psychological differences and real-world and fictitious conspiracy theories. British J. Psych. 102(3):443–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tao Y, Mishra A, Masyn KE, Keil M (2022) Addressing change trajectories and reciprocal relationships: A longitudinal method for information systems research. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 50:1–60.Google Scholar
• Tarafdar M, Gupta A, Turel O (2013) The dark side of information technology use. Inform. Systems J. 23(3):269–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson SA (2022) Fed up with Google, conspiracy theorists turn to DuckDuckGo. New York Times (February 23), https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/technology/duckduckgo-conspiracy-theories.html.Google Scholar
• Trang S, Trenz M, Weiger WH, Tarafdar M, Cheung CM (2020) One app to trace them all? Examining app specifications for mass acceptance of contact-tracing apps. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 29(4):415–428.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uscinski J, Enders A, Klofstad C, Seelig M, Drochon H, Premaratne K, Murthi M (2022a) Have beliefs in conspiracy theories increased over time? PLoS One 17(7):e0270429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uscinski J, Enders A, Diekman A, Funchion J, Klofstad C, Kuebler S, Murthi M, Premaratne K, Seelig M, Verdear D (2022b) The psychological and political correlates of conspiracy theory beliefs. Sci. Rep. 12(1):21672.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Broeck A, Ferris DL, Chang CH, Rosen CC (2016) A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. J. Management 42(5):1195–1229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Mulukom V, Pummerer LJ, Alper S, Bai H, Čavojová V, Farias J, Kay CS, et al. (2022) Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review. Soc. Sci. Medicine 301:114912.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Prooijen JW (2019) An existential threat model of conspiracy theories. Eur. Psych. 25(1):16–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Prooijen JW, Douglas KM (2018) Belief in conspiracy theories: Basic principles of an emerging research domain. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 48(7):897–908.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Prooijen JW, Van Lange PA (2014) Power, Politics, and Paranoia: Why People Are Suspicious of Their Leaders (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Prooijen JW, Van Vugt M (2018) Conspiracy theories: Evolved functions and psychological mechanisms. Perspect. Psych. Sci. 13(6):770–788.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Xu X (2012) Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quart. 36(1):157–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quart. 27(3):425–478.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Visschers VH, Siegrist M (2013) How a nuclear power plant accident influences acceptance of nuclear power: Results of a longitudinal study before and after the Fukushima disaster. Risk Anal. 33(2):333–347.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang H, Van Prooijen JW (2023) Stolen elections: How conspiracy beliefs during the 2020 American presidential elections changed over time. Appl. Cognitive Psych. 37(2):277–289.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang Q, Yang X, Xi W (2018) Effects of group arguments on rumor belief and transmission in online communities: An information cascade and group polarization perspective. Inform. Management 55(4):441–449.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webster DM, Kruglanski AW (1994) Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 67(6):1049.Google Scholar
• Wei KK, Teo HH, Chan HC, Tan BCY (2011) Conceptualizing and testing a social cognitive model of the digital divide. Inform. Systems Res. 22(1):170–187.Link, Google Scholar
• Witte K (1992) Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Comm. Monographs 59(4):329–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wood MJ, Douglas KM, Sutton RM (2012) Dead and alive: Beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Soc. Psych. Personality Sci. 3(6):767–773.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu H, Teo HH, Tan BC, Agarwal R (2009) The role of push-pull technology in privacy calculus: The case of location-based services. J. Management Inform. Systems 26(3):135–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yu J, Hu PJH, Cheng TH (2015) Role of affect in self-disclosure on social network websites: A test of two competing models. J. Management Inform. Systems 32(2):239–277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao Y, Calantone RJ, Voorhees CM (2018) Identity change vs. strategy change: The effects of rebranding announcements on stock returns. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 46:795–812.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zwicker MV, Van Prooijen JW, Krouwel AP (2020) Persistent beliefs: Political extremism predicts ideological stability over time. Group Processes Intergroup Relations 23(8):1137–1149.Crossref, Google Scholar